Saturday, May 18, 2013

Corruption in the IRS?

This weekend there was a big story sweeping the news.  It was about how the IRS in Ohio was handling certain tax exemptions regarding organizations that identified as Tea Party or conservative.  The IRS was specifically not offering exemptions to those organizations when they applied for them.  This article explains the situation in greater detail.

On the surface this appears entirely political and there is no excuse for targeting political affiliation for tax cuts.  However, the commissioner of the IRS that has just recently resigned, Steven Miller, said that "while 'intolerable', it 'was not an act of partisanship'".  But how much should we trust one of the men that was supposedly involved in this scandal?

It seems as if this scandal was clearly intentional, drawing skepticism with whether President Obama was involved.  Obama claims that this act was "inexcusable", trying to emphasize that he was not involved.  But who do we believe?  The president, the IRS, the organizations wanting exemptions?  This is a very sticky situation and until more details come out it is difficult to target who is too blame.  Nevertheless, this was unconstitutional and warrants serious repercussions including a criminal investigation for those involved.  It is completely unjust to determine tax exemptions on political affiliation and this sort of activity must be monitored in the future.

The purpose of the IRS is to enforce the tax laws, not to determine a political agenda.  In this case, the IRS went beyond their bounds to discriminate against conservatives and Tea Party organizations.  What if, however, the IRS began auditing based on race instead of political affiliation?  Would this draw more attention?  I certainly believe that this would become a significant national issue that would create more controversy.   This example shows how certain issues are prioritized based on controversy.  As a result, race auditing would receive more media attention, making the issue seem more prevalent.  It is a shame that certain controversies are only recognized if the media chooses to cover them, even if the same felony is committed, but it's all about the money.  And race controversy sells.

How do you think this issue would be different if it was a particular race being targeted as oppose to support of a political party?  And how much do you think the media has to do with the attention of certain events?  Please comment below.

No comments:

Post a Comment